I believe you are correct. Simply shipping the wrong cord types to certain locations is actually prohibited, and in general, including incorrect types could be viewed as endorsement of their use in other areas. A thing that should be simple, now gets complicated.
On occasion, I've heard manufacturers say things like "*I've heard of this but have no official knowledge that it's true*", as a way to side step liability. I'm not certain this is considered a valid argument, should someone be injured. While it's convenient and sometimes cost effective to make shipping kits more generic, I usually recommend including in BOMs some indicator of the ISO Alpha-2 or ISO Alpha-3 country code and make kits so the correct materials are included for the location involved. I find that, although seemingly simple, it's very easy to get tripped up over such matters. I've also had difficulty in the past with multi-language labeling, i.e. combined language labels. In certain countries people become offended if the wrong language is on products along side their own language. In this case I'm thinking of a 4-language label I once used. Best regards, Doug Douglas E Powell Laporte, Colorado USA On Fri, Aug 11, 2023, 8:27 AM Chas Grasso <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Doug - Wow I had no idea that this issue existed. Thanks for > bringing it up! > As I understand that the inclusion of incorrect cords in a package spreads > the incorrect > conclusion that ALL of the cords are suitable for use. Did I get that > right? > > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 8:00 AM Douglas Powell <[email protected]> wrote: > >> * This message originated outside of DISH and was sent by: >> [email protected] <[email protected]> * >> ------------------------------ >> All, >> >> I was talking with a client recently about shipping line cords to various >> countries around the world and how some do not allow the incorrect cords >> within a shipment while others do. Brazil, as far as I know, does not >> permit incorrect cordage. Argentina, Australia, and China (PRC) are all >> mutually exclusive. South Africa and India are mutually exclusive. Japan, >> Taiwan, and the United States are all mutually exclusive. If not >> prohibited, it is frequently cheaper to include multiple cords rather than >> create multiple regional SKUs when products are in low-volume production. >> >> That said, apparently the China market often likes to use US-style >> receptacles (types A or B), even though they use 220 V (😬). The US-style >> plug has better density (twice as many receptacles in the same space as the >> China receptacle (Type C, or I ?), and with the US receptacles, there are >> many more aftermarket cable options available. So I suppose that's my >> question: "Is this usage typical in China?" >> >> Of course, the big issue is that the US plug is not rated for the higher >> voltages, even though historically some people may say it works. I even >> fouind a website that shows this, >> https://www.travelchinaguide.com/essential/electricity.htm >> >> I believe it is critical for manufacturers to not condone the use of the >> US plug in this manner, which appears to be common practice. And I usually >> advise that this type of usage should never be described, recommended, >> or mentioned in any manuals, brochures, or other written material produced >> by a company, either externally or internally. If anyone is injured and an >> investigation reveals agreement with this usage, the company may be held >> liable. >> >> Thoughts?? >> >> -Doug >> >> >> Douglas E Powell >> Laporte, Colorado, USA >> [email protected] >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/coloradocomplianceguy/> >> >> (UTC-06:00, US-MDT) >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc >> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to All >> emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to >> unsubscribe) <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html> >> List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] >> Rick Linford at: [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> ------------------------------ >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 >> > > > -- > > Charles Grasso > > Dish Technologies > > (c) 303-204-2974 > > (w) 303-706-5467 > > (h) 303-317-5530 > > (e ) [email protected] > > (e2) [email protected] > - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> _________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1
